Thomas L. Friedman, the three-time Pulitzer Prize winning foreign affairs columnist of The New York Times and the author of the best-selling The World is Flat, has written a piece on the monster that threatens to gobble up India—the Tatas’ one-lakh-rupee, four-door, four-seat, rear-engine car.

“India is in serious danger — no, not from Pakistan or internal strife. India is in danger from an Indian-made vehicle: a $2,500 passenger car, the world’s cheapest.

“We have no right to tell Indians what cars to make or drive. But we can urge them to think hard about following our model, without a real mass transit alternative in place.

“So what should India do? India can’t ban a $2,500 car, but it can tax it like crazy until it has a mass transit system that can give people another cheap mobility option, said Sunita Narain, the dynamo who directs New Delhi’s Center for Science and Environment…

“If India just innovates in cheap cars alone, its future will be gridlocked and polluted. But an India that makes itself the leader in both cheap cars and clean mass mobility is an India that will be healthier and wealthier.

“It will also be an India that gives us cheap answers to big problems — rather than cheap copies of our worst habits.”

12 comments

I fully sibscribe to Sunita Narain’s views, about taxing the car heavily, so as to make public transport, a mass transit system, more amenable and therby leading to a less polluted, less oil dependent economy. India cant follow in the footsteps of US, where public transport is not a viable option, and so it resulted in US becoming a gas guzzling nation and contributing to maximum green hosue gas efects. With the sort of population India has, and the already traffic choked cities, the introduction of a cheap car can have disastrous efects on the ecology and environement. And an increasingly gas dependent economy too will result, all leading to an even further deterioration in the quality of life of poorer sections of society, afterall it is they who have to bear the brunt of all the diastrous policies that a govt indulges in, even as it panders to the profits of the corporations. Globalization has not been good to poor any where, whether it is developed countries or developing contries. Just as always poor subsidize the rich, the sort of globalization that we are seeing is corporate globalization at its best, and increasingly consumerist society – India is on the way already towards this consumerist culture. And cheap cars will only add to this consumerism making life even more chaotic.

Anyone know much about congestion charges and whether that can help? Car pooling is picking up in Bangalore and we need more clever market based solutions like that. A fixed upfront tax is no use. It should depend on the amount of use, route used and the vehicle.

Good roads and public transport are also required. Good luck getting our Govt. to execute on that.

How can people say that only ‘rich’ can drive gas-hogging cars, but poor should travel by city-bus? Going by this, why cant we ban two-wheelers? When Merc or some other big guys release latest SUV, people seem to be happy (even if I can’y buy one, at least I will get to see in Jayanagar jind of mentality!!!).
There are so many nice solutions to this big problem (infrastructure, pollution etc.) and bashing Tata is meaningless. For e.g. why worry about widening road in Bangalore or building flyover in Bangalore? Instead spend fraction of that in Tumkur and let decentralized growth be the key goal….
On the other hand, if Tatas does not meet safty, pollution etc. norms, then it is different matter.

Another beautifully designed, well thought out tax that will disproportionately impact the poor and the lower middle class.

Think about it. It is OK for the rich to pollute the environment because they can afford to, and because they are fewer in number, but not OK for the poor since there are more of them?

Small cars are actually far more fuel efficient than the gas guzzling SUVs and Hummers that the rich drive around. They are even more fuel efficient than the sedans and tthe “big cars” that the middle class and upper middle classes seem to favour. Why don’t we attack these and make them simply unbuyable for anybody not as rich as Bill Gates?

Why not destroy the auto industry as a whole? Why not shut down every car, SUV and jeep plant, and demand that only buses, trains and planes be made (and bicycles, if we want to make some leeway for some individuals)? Why should our Netas have cars? Why not demand that they use public transport of the “public” kind, where you get groped, shoved, pushed, elbowed and learn to enjoy the differences between morning breath, sambhar breath and smoke-alcohol breath of your co-passengers?

Ignore the above rant.

Thomas Friedman is totally wrong when he talks about “cheaper copies of our bad habits”. For a start, small cars never took off in the US. Gas guzzling American sedans were replaced momentarily by Japanese/Korean energy efficient models before being replaced by big fat SUVs as the choice of transportation. A small car is nothing like any of the above anyway. It is far more fuel efficient, cheaper to make and own. Even if India has as many as twice as many small cars as the USA has cars, I’m sure we will not have anything like the same kind of emission and congestion problems( the latter dependent on getting US style highways, something we MUST emulate the US on).

Coming to the traffic jam issue, it is more a lack of proper, planned development than any real explosion of cars. If civic and municipal authorities ran with anything the efficiency they are supposed to be run with, our traffic problems would be far less. Apart from bad planning, you have illegal constructions, rasta rokos, dharnas, bandhs, “VIP movement” all adding to the problem. By demanding that people don’t buy cars who are we trying to reform here?

We are in no danger from the small car, big multinationals, “global warming”, Pakistan, Islamic fundamentalists or even Indian companies. The biggest threat to India comes from the rulers themselves.

Friedman figured it out now. Vehicle drivers must have figured it out when Tatas first announced the car. It’s only the Tatas who have put money above common sense and the interests if the country. Time someone clamped down on these ridiculous car projects.

With no mass transit system, Indian cities are doomed. Well, Bangalore is already gasping for breath and it is only a matter of time that the city is declared DEAD. The Rs.1 lk car will only add to the misery and should not be allowed to hit the roads. Cities will soon look uglier with many more flyovers and underpasses. If someone is happy with a merc or a bmw, we have only one for few thousands, unlike the 1-lakher. If decentralisation is the suggestion, it is only me and you understanding this and not the politician.

SUVs of the West are major guzzlers. At the same time, most European countries look beautiful still as they have trains all over.

A 1 lac rupee car will only ensure more vehicles ply our roads. More cars – more pollution – more congestion? I end with a question mark for reasons mentioned below (see boon).

The car is said to be gearless (not sure if this is same as automatic transmission) – like kinetic honda – expect any one to start driving this car. Expect more accidents?

Boon:

I read it will do 70 miles (112 km) per gallon = 30km per litre.

It won’t be a fast car – in a way it becomes safer due to lesser chance of speeding.

It will be a 4 seater (driver included) – we could finally see the end of a rickshaw coming up.

Would people ditch their 2 wheelers – I am not sure (those who drive 2 wheelers only to get past congested traffic may stick to it). Those who buy 2 wheelers due to cost factors may be happy to consider a 1 lac rupee car. Those who are not happy about two wheelers being safe may choose this car as well. On balance I am hoping there is decline of two wheel drives.

At 30km per litre – with speed restrictions – this may be the best personal vehicle on the city roads with regards pollution.

If (a big if) with time (4-5 years) 2 wheelers and 3 wheelers decline – traffic will be more uniform = possibly less chaotic and despite being bigger in volume may flow better – leading to reduced congestion. Also noise pollution may be lower.

Anyone who has driven an automatic will agree its safer to drive it as you don’t have to multi-task with clutch, gear, accelerator – better control could mean our roads are safer (especailly at reduced speeds).

In places like Mumbai, I will prefer this 1 lac rupeee car as a taxi rather than those old rusted Fiat taxi’s.

So from hating the idea of a 1 lac car, I am coming to terms with it (presuming what I have read is correct). The car being less polluting may well be an indulgence in to a lesser evil.

Yet, I believe Tata and the like have an obligation to start providing free driver education to the public, sadly they are turning a blind eye to road safety.

Has anyone used public transport! Most of the people talking about using public transport for daily travel have no idea how much of a pain it is to use buses and trains to travel to work daily year after year! I have been using trains in tokyo for the last 18 months and it is a painful experience. I think tokyo has the BEST public transport infrastructure in the world ( hats of to them ) but it is not enjoyable and can be extremely frustrating. Crowded trains are extremely unpleasant, try getting into a train during rush hour on any of the tokyo subway lines. Most of train routes are kept running by heavy government investment, most make losses, even the ones that are used a lot. I think the cost ( monetary, environmental,etc ) of moving people around needs to be given a lot more thought.

My two cents…All views expressed above a personal, and the very fact that I choosen to express them proves they are worthless. :)